What's cooking with Pystd, the experimental C++ standard library?

Pystd is an experiment on what a C++ standard library without any backwards compatibility requirements would look like. It's design goals are in order of decreasing priority:

• Fast build times
• Simplicity of implementation
• Good performance

 It also has some design-antigoals:

• Not compatible with the ISO C++ standard library
• No support for weird corner cases like linked lists or types that can't be noexcept-moved
• Do not reinvent things that are already in the C standard library (though you might provide a nicer UI to them)

Current status

There is a bunch of stuff implemented, like vector, several string types, hashmap, a B-tree based ordered map, regular expressions, unix path manipulation operations and so on. The latest addition has been sort algorithms, which include merge sort, heap sort and introsort.

None of these is "production quality". They will almost certainly have bugs. Don't rely on them for "real work". 

The actual library consists of approximately 4800 lines of headers and 4700 lines of source. Building the library and all test code on a Raspberry Pi using a single core takes 13 seconds. With 30 process invocations this means approximately 0.4 seconds per compilation.

For real world testing we have really only one data point, but in it build time was reduced by three quarters, the binary became smaller and the end result ran faster.

Portability

The code has been tested on Linux x86_64 and aarch64 as well as on macOS. It currently does not work with Visual Studio which has not implemented support for pack indexing yet.

Why should you consider using it?

Back in the 90s and 00s (I think) it was fashionable to write your own C++ standard library implementation. Eventually they have all died and people have moved to the one that comes with their compiler. Which is totally reasonable. So why would you now switch to something else?

For existing C++ applications you probably don't want to. The amount of work needed for a port is too much to be justified in most cases.

For green field projects things are more interesting. Maybe you just want to try something new just for the fun of it? That is the main reason why Pystd even exists, I wanted to try implementing the core building blocks of a standard library from scratch.

Maybe you want to provide "Go style" binaries that build fast and have no external deps? The size overhead of Pystd is only a few hundred k and they only depend on libc (unless you use regexes, in which case they depend on libpcre, but you can static link it if you prefer).

Resource constrained or embedded systems might also be an option. Libstdc++ takes a few megabytes. Pystd does require malloc, though (more specifically it requires aligned alloc) so for the smallest embedded targets you'd need to use something like the freestanding library. As an additional feature Pystd permits you to disable parts of the library that are not used (currently only regexes, but could be extended to things like threading and file system).

Compiler implementers might choose to test their performance with an unusual code base. For example GCC compiles most Pystd files in a flash but for some reason the B-tree implementation takes several seconds to build. I don't really know why because it does not do any heavy duty metaprogramming or such.

It might also be usable in teaching as a fairly small implementation of the core algorithms used today. Assuming anyone does education any more as opposed to relying on LLMs for everything.